Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutPUBLIC HEARING - 2019-07-17 - REZONING - ETKIN OF LIVONIA PUBLIC HEARING MINUTES OF MEETING Held on Wednesday, July 17, 2019 A Public Hearing of the Council of the City of Livonia was held at the City Hall Auditorium on Wednesday, July 17, 2019. MEMBERS PRESENT: Laura Toy, President Jim Jolly, Vice-President Scott Bahr Brandon Kritzman Brian Meakin Cathy White MEMBERS ABSENT: Kathleen McIntyre OTHERS PRESENT: Mark Taormina, Director of Economic Development Paul Bernier, City Attorney Gretchen Guisbert, Recording Secretary The Public Hearing was called to order at 7:04 p.m. with President Laura Toy presiding. This is a Public Hearing on Petition 2019-02-01-02 submitted by Etkin Management, L.L.C., to rezone the property located on the north side of Seven Mile Road between Newburgh Road and the I-275/96 Expressway (37640 Seven Mile Road) in the Southeast ¼ of Section 6, from R-U-F (Rural Urban Farm) to R- 8 (High Rise Multiple Family Residential District – Maximum four (4) Stores). The Public Hearing is now open. There were approximately 60 people in the audience. Toy: Mr. Taormina? Taormina: Thank you Madam President. Again, this is a request to rezone property from the R-U-F (Rural Urban Farm) classification to R-8 (High Rise Multiple Family Residential District – Maximum four (4) Stories). This rezoning involves two parcels that are located at the Northeast corner of Seven Mile and Victor Parkway. The two parcels are separated by a drainage channel. The parcel with the address of 37640 Seven Mile Road, measures approximately 6.38 acres. The parcel at 19290 Victor Parkway measures 3.79 acres. The North 100’ of 19290 Victor Parkways is excluded from this rezoning request. Thus, the zoning change would affect only 8.83 acres of the overall parcel, which is 10.17 acres. The purpose of the rezoning is to allow for the development of a multi-family residential apartment complex. Depending on the specified zone that is designated or enumerated under section 27.04(b), which ranges from Zones I-IV, buildings are required to be over two stories with a maximum height of 20 stories. The R-8 designation by itself, limits the height to four stories. Immediately to the North of the subject properties are residential homes that are on Northland Street, which is zoned R-U- F, Rural Urban Farm. To the East is a childcare center zoned R-C, Condominium Residential. To the South to across Seven Mile Road, is a small office building (OS) as well as Mission Health Medical Center, which is zoned PO, High-Rise Professional Office and residential homes that are in the Caliburn Manor and Melody Manor (R-3) subdivisions. And then to the West across Victor Parkway are several office buildings (OS), as well as a pond that is used for storm water retention. A little bit about this site’s history. In 1997 a Consent Judgement was entered into between the City and Oakwood Health Systems. The Consent Judgement divides the property into three distinct parts and addresses the future use and development of each part separately. Parcel A includes most of what is now 37640 Seven Mile and is located south of the drain. Despite the current R-U-F zoning, the Consent Judgement treats Parcel A as if it is zoned office. (3- story medical office and ambulatory care facility). Parcel B encompasses a portion of what is now 19290 Victor Parkway and contains about two acres North of the drain located at the West end of the property. Parcel B is also zoned R-U-F and is required under Consent Judgement to remain as open space and is subject to an Open Space Preservation Agreement. Parcel C is mostly on the North side but at the East end and includes a portion of 19290 Victor Parkway. Originally Parcel C was intended to be developed consistent with multi-family housing under the R-C (Condominium Residential) zoning classification. However, in 2006 Talon Development Company sought and obtained approval to amend the Consent Judgement, in order to develop the Eastern part of Parcel C, as a child day care facility. The Consent Judgement also requires that 100 ft. wide Landscape Buffer along the North end of Parcel B, as well as a portion of Parcel C, all of which is included within the legal description of the Petitioner’s property but is excluded from the area that is proposed to be rezoned. The petitioner intends to maintain this area as a buffer between the new development and the existing single-family homes along Northland. Over time there have been three amendments to the Consent Judgement. The latest amendment allows for the construction of a 1-story, 54,000 sq. ft. office-research building. This is the site plan that is approved for that site. This is a rendering of the building that was also approved for that site. The current request seeks the rezoning of Parcels A, B and a portion of Parcel C for the development of a multi-family apartment community. The preliminary site plan which you see here, shows 2 buildings. The main apartment building, which is on the South side of the drain and a second smaller apartment building on the North side. Both structures would be 4 stories in overall height. The Project Overview indicates that there would be a total of 265 units, comprised of 1-, 2- and 3-bedroom apartments. The density on the portion of the property that would be rezoned to R-8 would equal approximately 30 dwelling units per acre or about 1,450 sq. ft. for each 2-bedroom unit, which corresponds more appropriately to the minimum land area required for a 9-story building under zone III. For a 4-story building under conventional R-8 standards, the minimum land area per 2- bedroom unit would be 3,000-sq. ft., which on the given site, would yield a total of 128 2-bedroom units. Additional waivers and modifications from the R-8 district standards needed to develop the site in accordance with this concept plan, include the setback of the main building from Seven Mile Road, the 1,000-ft. separation of a multi-family development from other residentially zoned property and maximum ground coverage. If the rezoning moves forward, the petitioner intends to seek special waiver use approval for a Planned Residential Development (PRD) under the provisions of Article XX of the Zoning Ordinance. In the case of PRD’s, modifications of the provisions of the Zoning Ordinance may be granted irrespective of the minimum requirements imposed under the zoning district in which the development is located. And with that, Madam President, I will be happy to answer any questions that you may have. This comes to you with an approving recommendation from the Planning Commission. Toy: From the Planning Commission? Ok. Thank you very much Mr. Taormina. Councilman Bahr. Bahr: Madam President, I have a question for you Mark. You talked about the 100-ft. separation requirement for the R-8 zoning that is being proposed here. Sorry, separate requirement is not the right word, the setback from the property line. So, with that in my mind, what is the purpose of carving out the 100-ft. wide section at the North of this property, to not be included in this zoning. Wouldn’t it either way, it would end up with the same result, right? Taormina: Yes, there are two separate issues. I think. The minimum required building is set back, typically from a residential district in the R-8 zoning. Under R-8 zoning there would be 85’. In this case, the Consent Judgement has that minimum 100’ wide buffer that is part of the Consent Judgement, so, what the petitioner has done here is drawn that zoning line at that 100’ buffer, which also exceeds the minimum required setback in this case, I think by 15’. Bahr: So, whether the entire property is rezoned is the R-8 or as proposed, just the piece minus that 100’ long strip, either way, what’s allowed to be done with this project is the same, correct? Taormina: What’s allowed in terms of, the setback they are showing… Bahr: I’m trying to understand what the purpose is for splitting the zoning. It doesn’t seem to make sense to me. Taormina: I think that’s a question that is more appropriately answered by the petitioner. Bahr: Fair enough. Thank you. Toy: Thank you, Mr. Taormina and thank you Councilman Bahr. Councilwoman White? White: This question is for Mark. Is there a valid protest petition? Taormina: There is not. And I believe the Council office sent to you this copy of this map over today. But we did receive a number of objections to the project. We have drawn out what that 100’ buffer line looks like from the area that is proposed to be rezoned, the properties are owned by the objectors and you will note here that no portion of those properties extend within that 100’ buffer. Chiefly because of that 100’ setback from Northland, so that does impact the ability to have a valid protest. We did not calculate whether or not it would be valid if they were entirely within that 100’ area or not, but as it stands, there is not a valid protest in affect in this case. Toy: (To an audience member who was speaking) Ma’am? Ma’am? Ma’am? Hold up and we will get to you. Ok. (To White) Was your question answered. White: Yes. Toy: Ok. Great. Alright. Council, do we have any more questions before we go to the petitioner? We will get to the audience in a minute but first we will do all this preliminary work at the moment. Perfect. We will get to you, I promise. Ok. Is the petitioner here? Sir, would you like to add anything? Yes? And your name and address for the record, please. Josh Suardini, Vice-President, Etkin Management, L.L.C,. 150 W. nd 2 Street, Royal Oak, Michigan. I have John Woods, who is our joint venture partner from DTN with me as well. Mark’s summed it up pretty succinctly and we’d be happy to answer any other questions that arise, but all the facts are in his summary and we don’t have anything further to add at this time. Toy: Ok, thank you. Yes, Councilman Bahr? Bahr: Sir, so I will ask the question I just asked Mark. What is the purpose for doing this split in zoning? Why not just rezone the entire property to R-8? Suardini: Quite honestly, when we looked, because we part of one of the previous amendments to the Consent Judgement, but this property had the 100’ foot buffer already on it as a means to, our conceptual site plan, we were willing to keep the buffer and leave the underlying zoning that exists. That’s really all there is to it. Bahr: I’m not trying to be contrary I’m just trying to understand whether or not if we zone the entire property and didn’t split the zoning, the Consent Judgement still requires the 100’ setback, right? Josh: Yes, our site wouldn’t need the rezoned, because we were going to leave it as basically, hold the buffer. Bahr: Ok, it’s just a statement, for discussion tonight, but it seems odd to me we would split the zoning on this. Frankly the only difference that I see with doing it this way vs. doing it the other way, where we zone the entire property that we typically would, I’m not saying this is what you’re doing, but the affect that I see is the valid protest issue. If that is the reason, I don’t like that reason for doing the split zoning. Whether that is the reason or not, it’s the only affect I am seeing. Somebody can educate me if I am missing something here. My position would be that if we are going to proceed with this rezoning, the entire piece should be zoned consistently. Frankly, for the audience’s sake, in case you don’t know, a valid protest is people that live within a certain distance of a proposed rezoning can sign a petition. If they get a certain percentage of those people, it’s a valid protest. And it basically requires the majority of the Council to approve it. Having said that, if this were to go that direction, I don’t think it’s a bad thing for projects of this magnitude to have a majority regardless. Not to mention the fact that it just gives the residents an opportunity to have a voice on it. That’s one statement position that I think it should only be zoned one way, not split zoned. Thanks. Toy: Thank you. Vice-President Jolly. Jolly: Thank you Madam President. I have a question for our City Attorney. In terms of the Consent Agreement, the two parties of the Consent Agreement at this time are Etkin and the City, correct? Bernier: That’s correct. Jolly: So there really is no barrier other than those two parties talking to each other to work a change, an amendment or anything else to the Consent Agreement or will we have to take that back to the…. Bernier: There was conversation about that. Quite frankly, it was viewed that we did not want to do it through a Consent Agreement because we didn’t want it to have any appearance as if we were cutting out the voter, the citizens of it. Because we could have entered into the Consent Agreement. Basically, we did what they’re proposing right now. It was the people who were involved that didn’t think that was the right way to do it. We wanted to have the open government, so everybody would have the opportunity to have their say and if it is something that Council thought was appropriate, fine. If Council thought it was inappropriate, that’s fine also. From our position, we just didn’t want it to be seen as us just doing it without having the citizens’ input on it. Jolly: I think your perspective is the right perspective. Just so we know going into this, do any further amendments have to be approved by the Court? Bernier: No. Jolly: So just the direct negotiation between the parties? Bernier: That’s correct. Jolly: Thank you. Toy: Thank you Vice-President. Any others from the Council before I go to the audience? Yes, go right ahead Councilman. Bahr: The purpose of Public Hearing is to hear from the audience and we certainly want to do that and even though based on what I read in your emails and phone calls and the personal conversations I’ve had, I think we probably have a good idea of what we’re going to hear. I want you to have the opportunity to say that. But that being said, there’s a couple of things that I want to head off at the onset. Just based on some repeating things that I have heard. Number 1, this is not a done deal. That was a question that has come to me that I get the feeling that there is a thinking out there that this is already decided. It’s not. Frankly, the reason we’re here tonight is because this has come to us once before. And when we realized that through purely an oversight, that the proper communication hadn’t been done for rezoning, we sent it back to restart the process precisely so we could get to this point in front of all of you. So, no decision has been made. I know, I saw the letter that went around to a lot of you, came to us and in reading through that, the comment was made that there are some Council people that support and some that don’t. If that’s true, whoever, sent out that letter knows more than I do. I honestly have no clue what any of my colleagues are thinking on this as far as support or not. I will be very honest with you. As I told some of you personally, I’m still undecided. I can see some merits on both sides of this and tonight will be important for me in that. Number 2, the second thing I want to hit. This is a zoning only tonight. So, while we see some ideas of what the developer would like to do with this property, the specifics on what to do with the site plan is something that will come later in the process. Without getting into a site plan tonight, I will tell you that if this were to go forward, there are a number of things about this site plan that I would want to see changed. I am sure I am not alone in that. So, tonight is a zoning only. Any records we see, is to give us an idea of the intent of the above. The third thing I want to address is, and I’m just going to call out the elephant in the room. Because a number of you have. And Paul, don’t get nervous here. I’m not going to cross any lines here, trust me. Obviously, it’s an election year. Ok? There is a lot of people when something like this comes up, that point to those of us who are up for election say here I’m going to watch and see how you are going to vote, which you have every right to do. I just want to say one thing at the outset, just before we get any of that tonight, anybody who has followed me through the last four years knows that I am very, very disciplined in putting what is best for the City ahead of any political considerations. And this will be no different for me. Whether I vote, and I really don’t know where I’m going to be on this, but whether I vote in support of this or whether I don’t, I value representatives that try to separate themselves from their political prospects and will do what’s best long-term for the City. And that’s exactly what I intend to do here. As we look at all the different things; traffic patterns, impact to surrounding neighborhoods, whether there is a market need for it, whether it makes sense for the City, the aesthetics when we get to site plan, all those things, all that is fair game. Let’s talk about those things. But of all the things I’m going to consider about this regardless of what my decision is, my political prospects will not be one of those factors. And I just want to make that clear right in front before anybody brings it up again. Thanks. Toy: Anybody else before we turn to the audience? Ok, let’s talk about when you come up to the microphone, what we need is your name and address, if you would please, and you do have the amount of time that you wish to speak. We’d like you to be cognizant of how long you are speaking so that you could give others an opportunity and then if you need to come back up, we will recognize you. When you speak, you need to speak through the Chair and the Council, rather than out to the audience, ok? Some of you have been here before. We’ve had a Public Hearing on this before, so, and the reason being, as Councilman Bahr or someone, spoke of, the process was not followed as far as public notification on this side, for whatever reason. So, that’s why we are back here tonight and that’s why Planning had to go back through it, so we welcome that. We welcome your comments and so to begin, we have a podium to my left, to my right, please again, state your name and address and please line up if you are here to speak. That will help us go a little bit smoother and quicker for you and others. No one wishes to speak tonight? (Laughter) Meakin: Now is that opportunity. Toy: That’s right. We will go to my left first. I think I recognize this young man. Boller: Thank you Madam President. Toy: You’re welcome. Boller: George Boller. 36270 Hammer Lane, Livonia. I am here tonight to request that this petition not be approved. I have one question for, Madam President, that I would like you to ask. Is the petitioner, the actual owner of the property? Toy: I’m not sure of that. (To Suardini) Are you guys the owner, Josh? Suardini: Yes, we own the southern piece, the northern piece. We don’t currently own the (inaudible) under contract. Toy: Ok, thank you so much. Boller: They don’t own the entire property? Toy: It doesn’t appear to be that way George. Boller: Ok. Let me just start by saying what goes around, comes around. How many here remember the early 1980’s when a developer, not from Livonia, wanted to build a high-rise structure in Victor Parkway? Anybody remember? Bahr: It must have been the late 80’s because I remember it. Boller: Who was it who spearheaded the successful drive to defeat that petition? Toy: It probably was you, George. Boller: No. I won’t take credit for that. Before he became Mayor, Jack Engebretson spearheaded the drive to stop that from happening. And he was successful in doing it. And he was representing the homeowners in Livonia. Not the developers. Now if I may continue, there seems to be a disturbing trend in Livonia. To increase the number of rental properties. In my case, the house behind me, the former owners that owned that since it was built in the late 1960’s. They were older, passed away and a family member inherited it. He sold it to a developer who was not a resident of Livonia. But is apparently an investor in Livonia properties. The property has been rented out and it is my understanding that the house rents for $2,400 a month. It’s a typical Livonia quad-level home, 80-ft. lot. It has all original equipment. It has never been improved. The investor, I consider him an investor, who happens to be from Northville, and lives in a very exclusive part, I think it’s Lakes of Northville. He is also on the prowl for other properties in the area. And she was in fact, successful in purchasing a foreclosed home on Vargo at the corner of Levan. And she purchased that. It’s a 4-story colonial with a large lot and it was purchased for $225,000. There are no improvements being made to these properties that are up for rental. I think a lot of us here in the room tonight are invested in our properties. Perhaps the Council might ask how many homeowners are here, and not renters. I don’t want to take too much time, but if I may just offer a couple more points for consideration. I looked up Etkin on their web page. Here’s what it said, “Etkin is a full-service commercial real estate firm engaged in the management, acquisition, development and marketing of office, industrial, retail, hotel and mixed-use properties.” You know what’s missing from that? Apartments. There is no indication that they are developers of apartments. Just let me close by saying I have faith that members of the Council will do the right thing for the citizens of Livonia and I thank you for consideration of my input. Toy: Thank you for coming tonight, George. To my right. Fitch: Good evening. My name is John Fitch. I live at 37773 Northland. My wife and I moved to Livonia about ten years ago from Detroit. We spent more than a year looking for just the right house in just the right city and location and we think we finally found it when we came to Livonia. Because we are very strong with the family in Livonia. To me more than any other area around here has always been family and predominantly, single-family homes like the one that we bought over there. There is a number of things I can talk about that would concern me. One is having that apartment building in my back yard. What’s the effect going to be on my property value. And if you know that street, it’s not a cheap street. We paid a lot of money to get in there and I don’t believe that putting 260-units, an apartment complex, in my back yard is going to improve my property value at all. So, that’s one concern. The other big issue over there is I know that we are in the process of adding to our west, two high-rise complexes in the doc location. All the entrance and exits of that are off of Victor Parkway to that onto Seven Mile. Now we’re talking about adding another 265 units and having that enter and exit off of Victor Parkway onto Seven Mile. If you guys ever go into that neighborhood in the morning when you are trying to leave to go to work? You’re going through five or six lights just to get to 275. There is only, it’s not even a half-mile down. So, the traffic over there is already atrocious. Adding that many more complexes to the area is going to make it even worse. But I know the others have a lot of things they’d like to tell you too, but I obviously oppose rezoning that property to a high-rise. It’s not that we are opposed to building anything. I moved in there expecting an office complex to be built over there or a medical center. Certainly not a 4-story apartment complex. Thank you. Toy: Thank you, Mr. Fitch. To our left here. Good evening. Patterson: Jenna Patterson. 37745 Northland Street. Sorry to have interrupted earlier, I just, while we were on the subject, I was thinking about it, so I didn’t want to lose my train of thought. But in regard to the valid protest. I don’t know that you were aware, but every homeowner that touches that property has signed a protest and turned it into Mr. Taormina. And I believe I was told by him that it can’t be a valid protest because it doesn’t directly touch the property with that 100 ft. buffer kind of thing, makes it invalid. I believe, unless I’m misspeaking, please correct me. So that’s our frustration as homeowners right there. They are putting this 100 ft. buffer. To us, it looks to be, like oh, you can’t protest this because we’re putting this 100 ft. in between. Just so you all know every property owner that touches that has signed a protest but I guess it’s not valid because it’s not the right percentage that touches with the 100 ft. or whatever, so I just wanted to make you aware of that. Again, obviously, I’m in opposition to it too. One thing, the traffic, I won’t go into details, we all know it’s a nightmare over there. And again, property values, that’s a concern. I have talked to friends who are realtors and they say that might not be what you are looking for. You only invest in Livonia because we like the community, it’s a good place to raise our families and we invest, expecting that you know, we will at least get our money out of it, not lose. Another thing, these types of complexes seem to be kind of a fad thing. Like, it kind of comes and goes, you know? What happens when that novelty is over and all these millennials decide, oh yea, I want a yard and a house for my kids. So that’s a concern I have there. Also, these have been referred to as being put primarily in areas where there is a downtown. My husband was actually just in Grand Rapids and drove by both of the facilities today and he said one was definitely in the middle of downtown, you know, where people can walk and go to the arena and go do things and the other one was just more in an industrial type of complex not in the middle of a subdivision. And I believe the one in Lansing too, is right off the freeway. I think I’ve seen it driving past there, so again, it’s not stuck in the middle of a subdivision or a community or anything like that. And, they are also building one in Novi, which does have more access to like a walking community where they can walk across, go to Mongolian Barbecue or whatever. So anyway, to me, if they are going to, if you are looking for something like that, I’d be going to Novi where I can at least walk someplace and get a cup of coffee or do something, not right next to the freeway. The other thing too, we are already building an apartment complex over there on Haggerty. Why not see what happens with that and kind of go from there. And then the other concerns I have too, that kind of relate to this, like earlier on, at the Planning committee, it was brought to my attention that basically there are a few things that were already went through with the City ordinance, 5.43, the site of a multiple-family development shall not be located within 1,000 feet of any other residential zoned property as measured from any point with respect to properties, which there are many residential areas already there. And another thing that I did not see in any of the paperwork, I did not see it at any meeting or anything was that there is also the written report by the Fire and Police department, shall be named prior to the action of the Planning Commission and again, I did not see that in anything. Maybe I missed it. Maybe it wasn’t there. But those are just a couple things that I didn’t see present at the last meeting that should have been there before we even got to here. At least from my perspective. And I think that’s it. And everybody here wearing red is in opposition, not everybody is comfortable coming up to talking but I just thought I would let you know that. Thanks for your time. Toy: Thank you very much. Peters: Good evening. My name is Curt Peters and I live at 18813 Glengarry Drive, in Caliburn Manor. I have lived in Livonia for 54 years now and moved to Caliburn Manor in 1997 and was one of the last people to buy a house in the area because they were mostly bought up at that time. One of the things I was interested in at that moment was what was that land across the street going to be used for. At the time the developer said well, they could build a 1- or 2-story strip mall or a medical facility, but it’s not zoned for anything large. So, keeping that in mind, that is one of the things that made me feel comfortable purchasing a home in this area because I felt that it would mean that nothing would go in there that would seriously detract from the property values in the area. Of course, as a person who buys a home, that is a concern. So, I realize that these can happen. Things can change but I certainly didn’t expect it change to something quite this drastic. To me, this particular plan is not very logical for the area. I’m seeing essentially a size 16 foot put in a size 10 shoe. It’s a very large complex being built on a pretty small area of land. The density of the population that’s going to be sort of living in that area is going to be relatively high compared to the communities around it. I don’t see where these people are going to go to enjoy life. Just the logical, you know, planning, doesn’t make any sense to me. Normally, when you build a complex as big as Jen mentioned a second ago, there are placed for pedestrians to go, there is maybe some shops, some things to enjoy, in apartment living. This looks like a rather large city development being dropped in the middle of a suburban landscape with not very well planned out logistics. I’m concerned that these people who live there are going to have nowhere to go except to walk into our neighborhoods and to essentially trying to find a place to go outside of their communities and as it is right now, our community is pretty full in Caliburn Manor, with people trying to enjoy the space as it is. Having that kind of additional 400 or 500 people, I don’t know where they are supposed to go. Our community isn’t really set up to handle all that. This isn’t an urban community. It’s a suburban community and I think that the differences matter. It matters to the people who bought there, including myself that this wouldn’t be an area suddenly overcrowded and where I can’t go out at night and enjoy taking a walk without having a crowd of people to deal with. I honestly don’t know where they are going to go. Our street is directly across from that planned structure, Glengarry Drive, and it looks to me like it’s a straight thoroughfare to go straight down our road if you want to walk your dog or you want to just walk around at night, I don’t know, again, where are all these people going to go. They mentioned a green area, but it’s really a dog run. It’s not large enough for all these people they’ve got planned on coming here. So, to me, again, this isn’t logical planning for people. The scale of development is just outlandishly large for the area it’s being put in. And I think the people who live here, in this area, should be given special consideration because we’ve been here paying taxes for 20, 30, 40, 50 or more years. Our investment in the City of Livonia, our loyalty to the City should matter. We shouldn’t be disregarded because somebody with deep pockets is walking and looking to make a lot of money in a small area for rent. This certainly could be other things; this doesn’t have to be such an extreme plan. Other people have mentioned the traffic issues. I don’t see, I have not seen any kind of valid study done as to what’s going to happen when you have a brand new high-rise hotel and a large apartment complex in such a close area to the traffic patterns in this area, which are already problematic. The roads are breaking down. There is a problem with traffic patterns already, almost the entire day. I don’t see any kind of real valid plan for what’s going to happen once this gets into place. Shouldn’t there be some kind of study then? I have seen nothing like this. Just a plan to build something, and well, we’ll worry about that later. I don’t think that’s good planning. As far as the pricing on this, they mentioned anywhere from $1,700 to $3,000 a month for people living here. I have heard these numbers and I don’t see how those numbers are going to be supported in reality when single use homes are available, people can pay anywhere between $1,600 to $2,000 a month to live in a home. Who is going to spend that kind of money for an apartment? I have heard them referred to as luxury apartments and they are saying well, it’s luxury because people are choosing to live in this location. And I say, how is it luxury? I don’t see any view; you’re not overlooking a beautiful city. I don’t see particularly good, a situation for traffic, getting your car in and out. I don’t see amenities. I don’t see anywhere you can go and go shopping or to a movie within, really, walking distance. There are no amenities in this situation. So, it’s not really a situation where you’ve got a normal apartment living situation. So, I don’t see this as luxury. I think those labels are misleading to make it sound more high-end than it is. I think the possibility of them having trouble selling these units for a reasonable price is very real. And if you end up with people who are, let’s just say, buy these apartments at much lower value, are they committed to the community the same way that we want them to be if they live in this city? Or are they going to be more transient? Are they really going to contribute to the city? Is that what we want as a city? Or do we want to build things where people are going to be invested in the city, not just making money outside of it. That’s not what this city has been about. I really hope it wouldn’t be what it would become in a time to move forward. I don’t think that’s moving forward. So, I guess in closing, I would just ask that the Council please consider what we’re asking. Consider that you do not allow this proposed structure, this petition by Etkin Management to go through, that this property not be rezoned in the fashion they are asking for. Toy: Thank you, sir. Yes, to my left. Good evening. Waterbury: Good evening President Toy. My name is Ed Waterbury and I live at 18415 Glastonbury Drive in Caliburn Manor. I have done a little research lately and I found some interesting things. On the city website it says that Livonia is the #2 kid friendly city in the U.S. Well, that’s a great thing, right? These apartments won’t be rented to people with children. The management company said it will be millennials without children and retired people ages 70 years old, plus. I’m not sure how that contributes to kid friendly. The other thing that was in the last meeting that the developer stated was that they felt that these apartments would be rented by millennials who tend to move around in their jobs so they won’t be long-term residents, but they feel there will be enough people moving to keep the apartments full. It sounds, I don’t want to use inflationary words, but, like transients. So, I don’t think that’s good for Livonia whose motto is “people come first.” I don’t hear “developers come first” in there, it’s “people.” So, I feel it’s important, I think everybody in here to some extent at least, is opposed to this. Ok? Another thing that I found was that Livonia is in the top 50 greenest cities in the U.S. I don’t think apartments tend towards green. So that might jeopardize that standing of our city. I think that’s an important thing to consider as well. I also found a study that was done by a company that is part of the Compass Bank, where they were looking at multi-family vs. single-family housing trends and their conclusion was that demand for multi-family housing relative to single-family housing has peaked, in other words, it’s not growing. So, more apartments aren’t necessarily called for. It says that older millennials forming families, people who are in their 30’s, they’re married, and now it’s time to settle down, have a family, has some children, they’re the ones that are driving the demand for single-family homes. Again, not for apartments, so in general, I don’t think that the kind of people that Livonia is looking for will necessarily be the ones that will rent these apartments. Also, in the meeting minutes from the last meeting, I believe it was in April or May, I don’t know the date, I apologize for that, but there was the hearing that they talked about it. In there, Vice-President Jolly asked a very direct question, “Will you at all in this project, be seeking any kind of tax incentives or any kind of borrowing from the taxpayer or the community here?” Great question. The answer was pretty much evasive. I think it’s safe to say we are not at that point yet. Our next step, if we get approval, we’ll be able to look at it. In other words, he did not answer the question at all. If they were planning to ask for tax breaks and so on. And a point that was brought up by, I apologize, I don’t remember her name, with the split zoning and the 100’ easement and not being able to have a, I forget the right term, a legitimate protest. Toy: Valid. A valid protest. Waterbury: A valid protest. That seems pretty evasive to me too. You know, like Councilman Bahr pointed out, why not just zone the whole thing the same way? It seems like, and I can’t read minds, but it seems like that was, at least, considered when the zoning was asked to be split. So, I just want to wrap up by semi-echoing what Councilman Bahr said. I think that everybody in here should exercise their civic duty to vote in the August 6 primary and to vote in the November 5 election. It’s what our country is built on. It’s the people having a voice in the government and being able to have some say in how things are going. Thank you. Toy: Thank you, sir. Yes sir. To my right. Sosnowski: Good evening. My name is Michael Sosnowski. I live at 18454 Queensbury Drive in Caliburn Manor. I can walk to the proposed development. I’ve been a Livonia resident for 43 years, 28 years in the sub., the fourth family to move in there. When I moved in it was vacant. It used to be a golf course; you probably won’t remember. Totally vacant land. You know what’s happened to that? We built a community of families. Tax-paying families invested in the community. Now, I don’t say something shouldn’t be developed in the proposed area. Not an apartment complex, please. I’m sure there are other more valid opportunities. I’ll give you an example. Newburgh, just south of Six, there’s a new subdivision going in right next to St. Timothy’s church. Single-family homes. An apartment building to me, I don’t see the personal investment and the transient term was used. I’m going to use that same term. These are transients. I’m sorry. Single, professional people, millennials, if you want to label them as such. They come and go. I don’t see the investment on their part in the community. It’s a place to live, a place to pad your resume and move on. Now, as far as, I’m glad the tax question came up because that concerned me too. Are we giving the developer a bonus to build? And I don’t see the investment on their part in the community. Properties go down and property values are now moving better. Ten years ago, they weren’t. What happens when we flip again? You got a vacant apartment building sitting there. You got blight. You may have default on property tax, and I have no idea what the assessment of an apartment building, tax- wise, is vs. a single-family home. I really don’t. I do know that the residents in that apartment building indirectly pay property taxes because that’s part of their rent, but they don’t directly pay property taxes. Traffic patterns aside, it’s a mess there. Everybody knows that it’s going to get worse. But as I was traveling through the City of Livonia at the city limits, I saw a sign that said, “Livonia – Families First.” I don’t see how this fulfills that motto. I really don’t. Let’s invest in families. I don’t know, the developers have a right to earn a living. Not there. Please. Ok. In all honesty when I got up this morning, I thought this shirt was red when I put it on. You get old and you know how it goes, so I just wanted to let you know where I stand on this issue. In closing, I really encourage that the Council live up to the motto that this city proudly bears, and that is, put families first. Thank you very much. Toy: Thank you sir. Yes sir, to our left here. Schewe: Good evening. My name is Joe Schewe. My wife Marilyn and I live at 19003 Glengarry Drive. Third in house from Seven Mile directly across from the area in question. We are 46-year Livonians and you keep hearing from a lot of old-timers tonight. That’s because we’ve been long-term investors in this community. In fact, that’s what brought us to Livonia 46 years ago, was to raise a family. It was highly touted. This is a great place to have a home, have a neighborhood, a community, and good schools. The schools probably were the first thing. So, we did that and then we moved west. All the way to Glengarry Drive, where for 22 years we’ve been looking at this empty space wondering what was going to happen. We just kept telling each other, my wife and I, hopefully it won’t be a business commercial. Hopefully, it will be residential. Not once did we think apartments. We never think of apartments in Livonia because we’ve always lived here. In fact, I knew someone who said well if you think it’s a place for families, and they should have homes, how come you’re still here? Because we’ve been retired for years. Well, I sort of laughed. But the reason we stayed is because we think this is a fine community. The reason, it is always at the top of various surveys, for whatever they are based upon, Livonia is always there somewhere near the top and I think the reason is, the bedrock of the community is homes, families and the schools. Now I’ve heard the population may be down. The schools, maybe not what they used to be. All the more reason to encourage new families, because someday us old-timers will probably move to Florida, I don’t know. We don’t plan on it. But we do. And before I forget, I did not have an acceptable red shirt. It does have some red, but that doesn’t mean I’m sort of against this. I’m totally against. So, you’ve heard the arguments. I know you understand the arguments of apartments vs. single-family homes. That’s what has kept all of us here all this time. So 22 years there, we were glad that something was finally going to happen over there because really, you’ve got some empty land there that probably could be used for something, but with the developments going around, I just kind of feel sorry for this Council because you have to sit down and figure out what the numbers are. The numbers are clear in some regards and not in others. We know for instance too; we know there are two roads accessible. Victor Parkway and Seven Mile. We know the acreage. I think I heard 8.83, but I’m not sure. But you know what the acreage is for this area. We know that they want 4-stories and they want 265 units. We don’t really know; nobody can tell you how many residents that means. Primarily adults. Why is that important, well, to me, and this is a big concern, living where we do, is how many vehicles that is going to add. I’m sure you’ve heard that argument. Where are they going to park? There not going to park on Glengarry, that’s for sure. They’re not going to park in the Mission Health parking, I hope. That would be dangerous anyway. Even more than that. How are they going to get in and out? You’ve heard all that too. I-275 is a great location. Attractive. I understand why a developer would want to build something there. It’s a great location. I have to admit. That is one reason we ended up moving there, so I could jump on 275 and go to work. I don’t have to do that anymore, but we still enjoy being there. I would ask that you do consider years ago, it used to say, “Families Still First.” I don’t know why they took the “Still” out. But the philosophy is still the same. And clearly, single-family homes make much more sense than apartments. As far as the traffic, it just makes me think when I was, a minute ago I thought of this while I was talking, but Yogi Berra said, “Nobody goes to that restaurant because it’s always so crowded.” People are already saying, I heard three people in the last two weeks who do not live there, say we can’t go down Seven Mile, we don’t even bother driving down there anymore because it is a disaster. And it’s going to be gridlock city, that’s the name I just came up with. If you believe in, you have to determine the numbers. If they are going along with something like this, you are talking 265 times, Etkin said at 1.5 vehicles, that’s 397.5 vehicles. We can say 400. 400 in that location and small size is to me, overwhelming. If this proposal were for one unit sitting in the middle of that land, none of us would object. You would because it would be a foolish, ridiculous use of the property. If it were for 1,000 units, I think everybody would agree, that’s way too much. 265 is too much. 400 vehicles are too much, if you get into that. I don’t even think you need to get into it. I think you need to reject the concept of apartments and that location. I am sure there is a more appropriate location for it, and I thank you for your time and consideration. Toy: Thank you very much. Yes? Peters: Rebecca Peters. I live at 18813 Glengarry with my husband and my two sons, one who is currently in Stevenson High School. I just, oh and I should be wearing red, but I came right from work. I just wanted to make sure that you understood that many of the people that are here today were at that meeting when the Board pushed this through for you to vote on and resident, after resident, after resident came up and spoke about their opposition to this. One resident spoke in support of it. And that Board turned their back on us. Thumbed their noses at us and went ahead and voted yes. Now you, as City Council, have the opportunity now, to stand with the residents of Livonia. To stand with the residents who live in this community, who live in these neighborhoods. And you have the opportunity today, to vote, to put families first for Livonia. Thank you. Toy: Yes, to this side. Let me just clarify one thing. That they didn’t push it through. It’s part of a process. It was an appeal, now to us. If Planning Commission denies something, they have, the petitioner has the right to come to the City Council to be heard as well. So, I just wanted to clear that up, so people aren’t misled on that. They have a right to come and appeal to the City Council, ok? We are not voting tonight. Just know that this will be on, it looks like August 12, depending on what direction any of us give to it. The next meeting would be August 12, 2019. Yes sir. Urso: My name is Ron Urso. I live at 37862 Pickford Drive. Listening to some of the comments today, I think what’s clear to me is that Etkin purchased some property for the development of commercial property. I work at Trinity Health on Victor Parkway. I believe ours is the only building that doesn’t say “For Lease.” It is clear that to me, that Etkin purchased the property and now has not the ability to use it for what they purchased it for. So, they teamed up with another group to try to develop it in a different way. Not for what it was intended for. That’s why they are here, to try to change the purpose of what that property was for. It’s clear that no one, there isn’t anyone here supporting it. No one wants luxury apartments here. This isn’t Lansing. This isn’t Grand Rapids. This isn’t a large city, it’s a family- first city that doesn’t want that development here. My suggestion is that we let Etkin sell the property to a developer for what it was intended. Let’s use it for residential property. There’s room for housing, and affordable housing in Livonia. Just like they are building at Six and Newburgh. There are people that want to live in Livonia. There is a high demand for people to live in Livonia. Not to rent in Livonia. Are there studies that have been done that say there is a demand for luxury living in this area? Last time, I was at the last meeting too. They said, the two gentlemen that are here tonight said Plymouth, Northville, they’ll want this type of thing. I suggest go to Northville. Go to Plymouth. Toy: Keep, sir, keep your comments right this way. Perfect. Yes, thank you. Urso: All I’m asking is they purchased it for a purpose. It’s clear to me that they made a decision that a direction went differently than what they expected. And now they are trying to find a use for that property. I suggest they sell it and let it be used for what the community wants for this property. Ok? Besides this apartment complex, the one that’s being built on Haggerty Road, the development of a Beaumont Hospital facility/Beaumont medical facility in the 1,2,3 Corporation space. After that the additional St. Joe’s facility asking to build on Schoolcraft property. After that, the automotive place that’s being built just on the other side of Haggerty Road in Northville. And the U of M facility. We are talking about bad traffic. We can throw out 400 vehicles, but we’re not even talking about other developments that are already in process that haven’t happened yet. I know that there are points in time here during a lot of the day and on most weekends, that I can’t make a left turn and go from across 275 toward Haggerty Road. It’s not possible. You can’t go to Eight Mile because that’s worse. You might be able to go down to Seven Mile or Six Mile and fight your way up Haggerty. It’s not good for the businesses that are there. We live there. We shouldn’t have to fight out way out of our subdivision. When we are talking about the number of vehicles that we’re talking about, is a huge number. Again, I ask you to consider all of the additional developments that are happening in this area at this point in time. I don’t know in what time. Has there been a study done? A study for traffic with all of these developments? I don’t have the answer to that. Toy: Not currently, that I know of. But others may know something. There was one years ago. Urso: We live here. We know what the traffic is like. It’s very difficult to try to get to things. To simply go to Haggerty Road and eat at a restaurant or go to the grocery store. The conversation started with the inability for people to go through this protest process and it’s clear to me that that was done or a change of how a majority of you are going to need to vote. And I agree with Mr. Bahr here who said, this should be more just a majority vote. I know exactly how voting goes, and I think it should be beyond what the normal is for this type of development. Thank you. Toy: Thank you very much. Mr. Bahr go right ahead. Bahr: I have a comment on your question. This isn’t a common thing. I just want to clarify that I didn’t say that I think this requires a simple majority vote, I’m just saying that if that were necessary to do a valid protest, I don’t think that’s a bad thing from something like this. But I want to make sure that, I don’t think it’s something we shouldn’t try to avoid. Question through the Chair to Mark if I can. Mark, I just want to make sure I understand something you said earlier. Something you said caught my attention that, for all the conversation we’ve had about this, did you say back in the 1990’s and early 2000’s that this was originally intended as multi-family and it was changed back then to Office Professional or Technical, did I understand that correctly? Or did I misunderstand that? Taormina: A portion of the Parcel of the Consent Judgement was authorized to developed under the R-C multi-family classification so, going back to this is actually the plan that was adopted as part of the Consent Agreement and as you can see where Parcel C is located, which is the Northeast portion, the area highlighted in yellow, that portion was approved for development of the R-C zoning, which is different than the R-8 in terms of its density and height allowances. Bahr: Ok, thanks. Don’t read into that. I’m just trying to make sure I understand the facts. Thanks. Toy: Thank you Councilman Bahr. Just to answer the gentleman’s question on if it was a valid protest. It would take five votes and the Mayor could overrule those five votes by offering a veto on that. He could also offer a veto when it came to four votes, which is a majority of this Council if seven are present at that meeting. Just to clarify that he has 14 days to veto any decision we make. Ok? And a lot of times he will offer a non-veto letter which means he’s not going to veto. Not to put it on the Mayor, but I’m just saying the process again, so it’s fair and balanced for everyone, is that way, ok, by our rules, etc. Is there anybody else wishing to speak? Jolly: Madam President. We’ve heard from numerous residents here tonight. This process has been going on for a couple months. This has been kind of batted around. Livonia and this Council in different ways. I think there are aspects of this plan that are intriguing, and tweaks would need to be done to make them viable. I don’t know if the time and the place and the location are necessarily the right thing for Livonia at this point, especially with the new apartments being built on Haggerty Road. At this time, I will offer a denying motion. Toy: Thank you, Vice-President Jolly. Do we have any other motions at this point? Meakin: Madam President. Toy: Yes, go right ahead. Meakin: Through the whole gamut of, the Committee of the Whole, I offer an approving on that as well. Toy: Madam clerk, we also have an approving and a denying and a Committee of the Whole. Bahr: Madam president. Toy: Yes, please go right ahead. Bahr: I’m not sure if this can be included under the approving or if it’s a request for it, but one of the things I’d like on the table to consider if we were going to approve it, as I said earlier, I think it needs to be approved as, oh you can’t approve the entire site because they have a petition for that. So ok, never mind. Toy: Right. Bahr: Again, I made my position on that clear, I guess there is nothing we can do at this point. Thanks. Toy: Thank you, Councilman. Were there any other direction at this point? Does everybody understand that? Audience: No. Toy: That’s ok. What we have offered, remember I said the meeting would th be voted on during the 12 of August meeting. Councilman Vice- President Jolly has offered a denying motion on the present petition to say no to it. Ok? Councilman Meakin offered the other part of the gamut, which could be an approving resolution and/or a Committee of the Whole. Committee of the Whole is when we meet probably on this issue, we’d meet down here. We normally meet upstairs and we find out, we dig deeper into other information, like maybe there is a traffic study. Maybe there are other things that we haven’t thought about or saw in our paperwork, etc., so that could also happen as well, as a Committee of the Whole. I chair the Committee of the Whole meeting as well. All Councilmembers are usually present at a Committee of the Whole meeting as well. It’s kind of like this only we are upstairs, and we dig a little deeper. It’s less formal. So, those three options, do you get it now, are offered for August 12, 2019. Alrighty? Ok. We do have three motions on the floor. I will go to my right. Thank you for reminding me, and sir, your name and address. Kuszynski: Erik Kuszynski. The address is 37734 Pickford Drive. Of course, in Livonia. First of all, thank you for giving me the opportunity to address you. A lot of people have talked about the traffic problems in this area and it’s well known. I took the opportunity to look on the SEMCOG website today to see what the accidents were at various intersections around that area. At Newburgh and Seven Mile Road, there were 19 accidents in 2018. At Haggerty and Eight Mile Road, Haggerty and Eight is a notoriously busy intersection. There were 48 accidents. At Haggerty and Seven Mile Road, the closest intersection to where we are talking about, there were sixty-one. There is no doubt this is the most dangerous area in Livonia. To disregard or downplay or kick to Wayne County, the problem of traffic, would be tremendously irresponsible. I’ll leave it at that. The developer says we should try to attract millennials. I think it’s unwise to try to attract people by what we think they want. Has anyone come forward and spoken in favor of this development? And your discussions, Councilmembers, with other residents in Livonia, has anyone expressed a desire for something like this? Have you heard from other people in other cities, saying yes, we think that would be great for Livonia to do something like that? Have other people said we’d move to Livonia if you did something like that? I’m asking a rhetorical question. I’m going to guess the answer is no on that, ok. That tells you all you’re going to know about the development. This is currently a field, but it’s not the field of dreams. Just because they build it, does not mean they will come. Furthermore, we don’t need to change to be successful as a city. When younger people are ready to raise families, they’ll seek the same things that boomers and Gen-X’ers have wanted for their families. We want well-maintained safe neighborhoods. They want strong schools. They want good city services. Good recreational opportunities and affordable housing stock. These are the very things that Livonia is known for. And when young people are ready to raise their families, they will seek us out for exactly what we are. As a city, we need to play to our strengths. We need to be who we are. We need to be good at what we do, and we need, and people are going to seek us out for exactly that. We need developments that are in line with our priorities and our strengths and this is not one of them. So, ladies and gentlemen of the Council, as you decide which way you want to vote, you can listen to the people or you can listen to the developers. They are both speaking very clearly. Thank you. Toy: Thank you very much. Yes. Krenz: Hi, my name is Gini Krenz. I live at 34075 Pembroke. I do not live in the affected neighborhood, but I drive Seven Mile Road. What brought me to the microphone is to piggyback on a comment that the gentleman before me made and he was referencing a comment made by the developer here. My son is on the Planning Commission in Northville. So, just for kicks I attend those meetings to see how he’s doing and of course, the hot issue is Northville Downs. The developer came with architectural drawings of massive, dense housing. Single-family apartments and Brownstone condos. There is a realtor on the Planning Commission, and she said those Brownstone condos do not sell. People who have them cannot sell them. They end up renting them. So, because of the traffic issue, also at Seven and Sheldon where they want to put a roundabout, with pedestrian crossing, has anybody been in England and tried to see what it would be like to cross a roundabout? Anyway, the Planning Commission threw it all back to the developer and told them it was too dense because of the traffic, emergency vehicles, narrow streets in and out problems, traffic isn’t the issue here but there you’re not quite a two sited plan yet, but something to think about that Northville does not want this. All of the residents at that meeting, and there were probably four times as many residents there as there are here tonight. Nobody wants that type of development at Northville Downs with apartments. They want single-family homes, but not the condos. So just something to think about that Livonia may not be the only city that would say no to something like this. Personally, for me, I would not pay $1,700 to $3,000 a month to sit on top of 275 and listen to all that noise. Thank you. Toy: Thank you. Yes, good evening. Phillips: Kathy Phillips. I live at 18766 Susanna Drive. I’m at Seven Mile and Victor Parkway. My husband and I oppose this because living in apartments invites crime. You get condensed, you get a good group of cars that invites crime and I don’t know if you know this, but I’ve been told by insurance companies that Livonia has the cheapest car insurance in the state of Michigan because the number of crimes compared to the number of people, businesses and people. So, I’ve been told that by a couple different things so that’s kudos. So, if it invites crime, it’s going to ruin our car insurance. But traffic is horrendous. I live here, we see cars running the lights all the time. If you don’t have a gridlock you have people speeding through the race lights. You have policemen, I hope there are no police in here, they are sitting on Blue Skies with their nose down instead of watching the cars flying through the lights. It’s like you have to look before going out into that intersection. And it’s already a gridlock trying to get out when you come down Victor Parkway, it’s a gridlock on Seven Mile. Costco, we have the largest Costco in the Midwest area now so traffic is increasing, it would decrease our home values and we are getting near retiring. I would like to sell for a decent amount, I know Livonia is good but, an apartment it just seems weird to put that in the middle of a field and there is nothing around. Inaudible… They may come but they are going to leave when they hear how loud the freeway is and the gridlock they get stuck in. They will come and go. Will more come, no, word gets around. So, I think it would be a bad thing for us. Thank you. Toy: Thank you, Ms. Phillips. Yes, sir. Simon: Hi I’m Simon. I live at Glengarry, address is 18882. My question for you guys is, what if the apartments remain empty after they are built? I’m the millennial they are talking about and I prefer to buy a house. But what if they remain empty, the 500 additional cars or 400 cars or whatever, that’s not going to help. There are kids in the neighborhood. If they are cutting through from Seven Mile going through a neighborhood, it’s unsafe. There are already cars speeding down that road all the time. The additional 500 cars would not help. It would actually be extremely dangerous. So, thank you. Toy: Appreciate it. Thank you very much. One to my left, yes. Huyck: My name is Gary Huyck. My address is 37596 Northland Street. So, again, I’m one of these opposed to having a 4-story apartment building right in my front yard. So, I have a lot of concerns and want to just echo a lot of the things that have already been said because I don’t think it hurts to have more than one person say these the same thing. I’m already concerned with number of cars and traffic in my area. Just getting onto Bethany street directly in a rush hour, I’m sitting there waiting to take a left, it’s hard as it is just dealing with the traffic. As was mentioned before, Seven and Haggerty, that whole intersection there is just absolutely horrible. I can’t believe a roundabout wasn’t even put in as part of that. I don’t know what’s going to happen with Seven and Newburgh. Seven and Victor Parkway right now is already a mess with people coming in and off of that street. I just think with the number of cars that we are talking about, having the access point and problems with Seven Mile there. Forget about the rest, and how big and (inaudible) for people on Northland Street. I just think this is the wrong thing to do here in that neighborhood. If it was a 1-level strip mall or something like that, with various, like a park added, then fine. If you look across the street and see a park, you see walking, you see something added in terms of someplace to go and to entertain yourself or just spend some time, but this dense of a community, I don’t think that’s a good idea and I hope that you also understand that this is not a good thing for the residents here, so again, my wish is to turn this down. Toy: Thank you very much. Yes sir. To my right. David: My name is David. I live at 18748 Nola Street in Livonia. I moved here to Livonia in 2011. When I purchased my property, it was a short sale. Since I have owned that home, I’ve invested quite a bit of money to bring it up to be a part of the community. I’m at the point now in my life where I can actually sell my home for about, for what I paid for it, and I’m able to invest that money into somewhere else. I guess my point is that if that property were to be developed into more homes or a condo, I’d consider myself safe. Why not do something to do invest in another area but still be in Livonia. I personally love the City of Livonia. I love the amenities. I try to look for excuses for potentially looking at a different city to potentially go to, but it’s hard to leave Livonia. I think a lot of people feel that way. I oppose that area for any kind of apartment, especially like you mentioned, a 4-story type of thing. It’s going to be an eyesore. I don’t feel it fits the demographic of the area and in fact, just recently, we had someone come through the area, knock on our door and ask us, hey would you consider someone who is running for Mayor of Livonia? And I said, uh, I would, but I oppose that apartment complex. If you were to look at that girl’s face, the people in the neighborhood, she’s heard it multiple times. You could see it in her face. She was like, yea, I’ve heard this before. I just wanted to say that I am definitely against this apartment complex going up. Thank you. Toy: Thank you very much. Yes, good evening. Patterson: Greg Patterson. 37745 Northland Street. My home would be on the north side of this project. I was actually over in Grand Rapids and I made a point to go over right by this facility. It is actually a chip shot or maybe a niner, depending on how much of a golfer you are, from Van Andel Arena. I don’t want to be Van Andel Arena. Ok? I looked at the facility in Lansing. I made a point to drive through that facility and if you guys have not taken the time, I would send you pictures I took. It’s basically, if you took that facility in Lansing and dropped it right by Costco and Walmart and Meijer’s, right over there, it would be dead in the middle. That’s what you have in Lansing. It is not an ugly building by any means, but you have lights, or LED lights, or whatever you want to say, so when you are driving down the freeway at night, guess what you see? You think it’s a hotel, but it’s actually an apartment complex. Not real pleasing to the eye driving through Livonia, I don’t think. So, just keep that in mind. If you guys want to see pictures, I took pictures and I would be more than happy to email them to you and what the surrounding area looks like. The one in Lansing is bare around the area. In fact, that facility has been there since 2015. It is 3-½ years, and they have yet to lease the space down below, so if that doesn’t tell you that’s not a hot spot, supposedly a hot spot, why aren’t businesses clamoring to be in that facility and be a part of that complex? So, keep that in mind. They are having problems 3-1/2 years later and they cannot lease that space. Again, that is not part of their property, it’s part of the property but not under their management, ok? But they cannot lease that space. So please keep that in mind. This is not good for Livonia, it’s not good for the neighborhood. Please keep that in mind. Thank you. Toy: Thank you very much, sir. Yes, hi. Kemppainen: Hi I’m Dorothy. 18750 Blue Skies. Who maintains Seven Mile Road? Toy: I’m sorry, what? Kemppainen: Who maintains Seven Mile? Toy: That’s Wayne County, if I’m not mistaken. Kemppainen: They struggle with keeping up with the maintenance of Seven Mile Road as it is. It is an extremely rough patch. It is full of potholes and they fill them every time. They seem to last for snowplow. I don’t think if we get more travel and more cars on that, that it’s going to keep any better. The other thing I want to mention is I have three kids. Two of them are millennials and one is younger. I don’t know what the younger generation is. The oldest millennial is 27, bought his own home. They all have solid jobs. The second one, the 25- year-old went to Detroit to live because they have so much more opportunity around those apartments. The third one went to Ferndale because of the same thing. There is nothing here in that area to draw the millennials in. I think. Thank you. Toy: Thank you very much Dorothy. Yes sir. Kless: Hi, Wayne Kless, 18362 Glastonbury. I just want to take the opportunity to thank all of our neighbors of Caliburn Manor, and those to the north, to come here. I think you guys have an easy job here tonight. Just do the right thing. I know where some of you live, you live in subdivisions just like we do. And we don’t want it and you shouldn’t want it. It’s not going to do anything for my neighbor who is retiring, and they want to sell their home. It’s certainly not going to do something for me when I go to sell my home. My neighbor just sold their house and sold it for $120,000 more than I bought my home for. That won’t happen. So, put single-family homes in there if that’s what you want to do, but don’t put this in there. Thanks. Toy: Thank you very much, sir. Is there anybody else? Yea, good evening. Klockner: Hi my name is Kathy Klockner. I live at 37680 Northland Street. I live on the north side of Northland, so I won’t be directly in the path of the site of this apartment complex. But I’m very personally th involved in that land. I’m a 4 generation Livonian. I sent letters to all of you, emails. I know some of you received them. My great- grandfather, my grandfather and my father all lived at Seven Mile and Newburgh. My grandfather had a farm which he took over from my great-grandfather. So, I grew up with farmland. I grew up running the fields and I know that whole area so well. Every time a development comes in, it personally hurts. Twenty-three years ago, rd I was pregnant with my 3 child living in New Jersey, with my husband. We had no family in New Jersey. We decided to move to Michigan. So, my husband flew to Livonia, my dad picked him up and showed him homes. Well guess where I ended up? Right down the street from my parents’ house, within walking distance. My kids, th 5 generation Livonians, all went to Livonia Public Schools and they grew up in a very similar atmosphere that I lived in, without the farmland, but we could ride our bikes down the streets. Our street has no sidewalks. It’s sort of a rural area. It’s kind of the best-kept secret in Livonia we always say because we are close to everything, but we have a rural feel. I have great neighbors and as you can see, we all love our neighborhood. We love our community. We’re proud to be a Livonian because of it. I’m proud my kids went to the same schools I went to. I can’t say how much happier I am living here in Livonia. My dad passed away seven years ago, and I think of him quite often as I am walking up and down our streets, looking at all the developments, wondering what he’s thinking. What my grandpa, what my great grandpa is thinking. They were the backbone of this city. It is our responsibility to think what are we leaving our children? What are we leaving our grandchildren? Apartment buildings? Crammed into little spots? Is that what we want for Livonia? We want to see our schools one by one close more? I mean my kids went through the legacy where our schools were closed. Heartbreaking. It divided our community for some time. Still hurts I might say. When my daughter graduated, where did she go? She th went back to her home elementary school, Taylor, to have her 6 grade picture taken because that was her school. You’re in charge of our future. Our kids’ future and we want the best possible outcome for that. We don’t want outsiders coming in and building ugly buildings that are not going to stand the test of time. They are going to add to all the problems that we have right now. As you’ve heard and I’m some of you have experienced, the horrid traffic problems. My mom still lives on Newburgh. I live right across the street. I can’t get over to her house on Sundays. It takes me ten minutes to cross Newburgh. Is it going to get worse? Trying to get out on Bethany our other escape? Same thing. You risk your life some days trying to get out when that light turns, boy you better your butt moving quick because they are gone. I want my neighborhood to stay a beautiful neighborhood. I don’t want to see an eyesore; I don’t want to see this development go through. I’m wearing red. Thank you. Toy: Thank you. Yes, Mr. Boller, go ahead. Boller: Would you indulge me please, one more question. Toy: Certainly. Boller: I’m looking at the, I believe there’s an aerial view of the proposed development? Toy: Ok. Boller: Nobody brought up the issue of wetlands. At least I haven’t heard. It looks from that aerial view, that, right up by the upper left-hand corner of the yellow border, it looks like there is a small pond there. Does anybody know if that’s the case or not? Toy: Mr. Taormina, do we know if there is any kind of pond or wetland there? Taormina: On the site itself, we know there is fringe wetlands along the creek. Boller: The reason I ask is, that two weeks ago my wife and I encountered a large snapping turtle in the middle of Victor Parkway. We got out and directed traffic around it and finally a couple that work at Trinity stopped and we helped to get it back over the high curb and headed back for a pond where I think it came from. There is a larger pond on the west side of Victor Parkway, but I think there is a pond over there too. If that property abuts that, wouldn’t there be some environmental impact to the development? I just raise that as a possibility, that’s all I’m doing. Toy: I’m looking, Mr. Petitioner, do you want to address that, if you would? Boller: Good thank you very much. Kritzman: That would typically be handled through the survey process and the site plan approval process. If there were any delineated wetlands that would be identified, I don’t believe there are any delineated wetlands on this property. As Mr. Taormina mentioned, there are wetland-type materials along the creek, but that does not constitute a delineated wetland that would be regulated in any sort of way that would inhibit the development, as Mr. Boller mentioned. Toy: Thank you, ok. Hopefully, that clears it up, Mr. Boller, for what Mr. Kritzman explained as well as Mr. Suardini. Ok. Ladies and gentlemen, we have come to the end of audience communication. If there is no one else wishing to speak to the Council, then we will move on and any other Council person want to make comment or the petitioner at this point? Kritzman: Madam chair. Just one quick comment. Certainly, we have heard a big range of topic areas, a lot of items to discuss and further, we could talk about architectural value, we could talk about size, we could talk about proximity to other properties. The one thread that makes the most sense to me, gives me the greatest sticking point, I can tell everybody right now, I’ve been a very pro-development person in my eight years here, but I believe in development in a responsible sort of manner. The thing that sticks out the most to me is the traffic coming out of Glengarry. Coming off of I believe it’s actually Glengarry Road, sorry, I mean traffic coming out of Caliburn from Glengarry, that I do perceive as a problem. I drive Seven and Newburgh each and every day, twice a day. Morning rush hour and evening rush hour. I drive it from Six Mile and Newburgh to Eight Mile and Newburgh and on to Halstead. Certainly, as this project has been a topic of discussion, I have spent a lot of time looking at it, purposely turning left there. Purposely spending time there. Purposely going out of my way there. I don’t think it’s terribly inhibitive now, unless you are turning off Glengarry and turning left onto Seven Mile. That’s a problem. I’m not your biggest advocate, sir. Listen, at the same time, there is a light at Blue Skies which it makes a whole lot of sense on the other side and I think it’s underutilized from the side of Caliburn Manor. I guess what I’m curious to see is the way I envision it being most successful, so that the property ends up being developed in a responsible way, so that the residents of Caliburn Manor are able to get in and out of their neighborhood safely and efficiently, there is a lot of people talking about Haggerty today. You know Haggerty is a privilege, it’s not a right. Getting out to Haggerty to go to a restaurant, that’s, it takes a while. You live there in Caliburn Manor, getting to a restaurant there, you know what, I live at Six and Farmington. I’m trying to get to the same restaurant. It’s not necessarily a matter of how many people live right there along Seven Mile. It’s the matter that the area is a destination for the entire region to be honest. It’s a destination for the entire city. There is not 100 people trying to get to it, there’s not 400 people trying to get there. There’s 96,000 people in Livonia who may choose at night, to go to dinner on Haggerty Road. My greater concern is that the people trying to get in and out of their homes to get to work and to get to grocery stores and get to those things in a more effective manner and a cleaner manner. What I see is getting off Glengarry and some sort of boulevard on Seven Mile so that you are able to turn right, without having to wait to turn left. You shouldn’t have to wait through seven lights to turn left off Glengarry. If you’re able to take a right and do a Michigan left around that, you are able to then to proceed west on Seven Mile into the flow of traffic in a much more conducive and safer manner. So, I’d be curious to see what it would take as a city, to take that next step and be proactive about doing that regardless of whether or not this goes through. To me, in my mind, that’s still a necessary step and because it is owned and operated by Wayne County, that is certainly something we are going to have to work with them. I’d be curious on our end internally, to find out what steps we should be proactively taking to initiate that process. That is certainly something that I’ll be looking into. Thank you. Toy: Ok, and you are asking for that as well, Councilman? Kritzman: I will ask for a report and recommendation from the administration on how to proceed with pursuing a boulevard entrance on Seven Mile Road. Toy: Thank you. Kritzman: It’s too close to the other intersection, it’s too close to the other intersections to have an additional left. You are not going to add a light at Glengarry if you’ve already got one at Victor Parkway. You can divert all the traffic from Glengarry into the older neighborhood that’s there onto Blue Skies which is already undersized as it is. Toy: Thank you Councilman. Anyone else from the Council? Yes, go ahead, Councilman Bahr. Bahr: Just a couple of final thoughts. Thanks for everyone’s participation. I enjoyed listening to it for the most part. I wanted to address one thing and just so you know. If you could see all my notes of things to consider, so we’ve got an approving, a denying, and a Committee th of the Whole. We’ve got a lot of thinking to do before August 12. A few of you asked some rhetorical questions about has anybody heard any support for this. The answer is yes. I only offer that as perspective for this. You guys, I understand 100% why the people in this room are against this. But the fact of the matter is I have had a number of people come to me, residents of the city, in support of this, including one who is in the business of municipal planning. And another one who is retired. Both of them expressed the need for these types of things for retirement, for people who are looking to downsize. I’m not saying, I’m just telling you, the question was asked if we had that kind of feedback. The answer is yes. For me, like I th said, I’ve got a lot of thinking to do before August 12, but Brandon told you what really resonated with him and I think for all the differences, I’m not going to go point by point, trying to separate what is relevant and what isn’t, but the one thing that you have said that probably resonates more with me is the piece about whether this, the ownership vs. the renting. It’s a compelling point that weighs pretty heavily with me and certainly this city, for better or for worse has taken a certain route with that over the years. The one gentleman gave a speech that I feel that I given several times, about Livonia doesn’t have to try to be other cities. We are who we are. We have a certain brand and let’s embrace that. I totally get that. Like I said, I’ve made that same speech myself several times. The other point which I’ve said several times, but is a factor when you go into this, is, I have a problem with approving a rezoning and that’s the split zoning. That’s not necessarily speaking to the type of development but as it’s written right now, I don’t like the way this is carved out the way it is. I think I’ve talked about that at length. I think I’m done. Thanks. Toy Alright. Certainly. Thank you, Councilman Bahr. Anyone else? No. I just want to say I’ve driven Seven Mile to the expressway from Five Mile and Hubbard for almost 20 years, so I’ve been down that way and I am now at an office down that way. I can see the congestion. Definitely there. But thank you for coming out tonight. You’ve made a lot of great points and everybody has the right to petition this city for whatever piece of property or whatever they are doing in our city. That’s what we’re elected to do to be up here and listen to folks and have a process so it’s fair and equitable to all. I hope we’ve done that for you tonight. You have an approving, you have a denying, and you have a Committee of the Whole. We look forward to seeing th you on August 12. Thank you for your comments. Gavel strike. Suardini: Madam Chair. We didn’t have a chance to respond. Toy: Sorry I didn’t see you up there. Go right ahead. We aren’t adjourned. Suardini: We just wanted to clarify a few points and John and I will both speak to several of these items. As it relates to the gentleman who asked about our website and our experience and apartment development. I wanted to point out that’s why we’re partnering with DTN. Because DTN has developed several of these with many, many, many units. I invite them to look at their website as to their capabilities. As far as the traffic goes, I want to point out, even though you guys have said this and reiterated it, we are here for a zoning petition. The traffic study was not part of that process. But we would invite looking into that in the future if this were to move forward. There was a comment about the multi-family type family development being a fad or what happens if the economy goes in a different direction but if you look across the country there are several of these types of developments that are number 1, very well occupied, no doubt, it really rides the economy very well. Secondarily, there is a lot of these types of developments that are built and developed along interstates, busy corridors, all over the country. To the topic of noise and people moving out, there’s people that live next to freeways, and as a matter of fact, some of the single- family homes that we’re talking about here today being affected by this or not, are closer to the freeway than this project would be. As far as who wants these apartments, in the luxury description of it. I think we made that clear last time, but the luxury adjective we are using is a luxury by choice. The choice to be able to rent vs. buy. That’s what we were talking about. The certain demographic that has been raised quite heavily here, about the millennials, is just one of the demographics that we would be attracting. Not all of them but one of them. Some people have talked about retirees but anywhere in between. We have provided studies that we follow all the time through various courses throughout the country that have shown that the ownership in single-family houses is declining and the demographics of renting is on the uptake. And we believe that. There has to be some stock in understanding that we wouldn’t be going forth with a development and investment of this nature if we didn’t truly believe in it. As far as parking, someone had asked about where would the parking be. The parking would be completely, 100% onsite. The site plan has shown that we would build a parking structure in combination with the certain spots but heavy on parking structure, so there wouldn’t be any parking that would be outside of the property. As far as the lease space, the gentleman had brought up in Lansing and John will talk a little more about some of this stuff, but in our proposal, our petition, we don’t have leasable space in the building other than the actual residential units. So, there wouldn’t be any commercial spots in the building that we may or may not be able to lease. I would say that when you look at opportunities for people to live in the city and we talk about the family first, this development is not going to shut its doors to families. They will have an opportunity to lease space as they so choose. We are not turning people away and if you go to other communities, across the country, having the ability and the opportunity to lease vs. buy is something that people think very strongly of. On the wetland issue, along the creek there is some fringe wetland there when we went through the site plan approval process with the office building that was flagged and tagged and confirmed by the DEQ and the County so we have done that once before and we believe it’s the same today and things haven’t changed dramatically in that aspect. Woods: John from DTN. The reason I am here is because housing has changed, and this is a common theme that I spoke of before I wrote a three or four-page narrative and submitted it to Council and Planning Commission. Hopefully you received it as well. It really explains how housing projects out over the next 12 years. I can speak passionately about this because I’ve built 3,000 single-family homes in Oakland County. I’m now doing partner business because of what’s happened to the single-family business and quite frankly, because of what’s happened to the single-family business dating back to 2008 and 2009, this house transformation has occurred. Our portfolio with DTN has doubled in value since the downturned mortgage crisis but we are still kind of fighting through the remnants of what happened, but the reality is between now and 2030, there is a need for about 4.4 million multi-family units. They are not just for millennials. Seventy-five percent of those units are projected to be built in suburban America; it’s not downtown Detroit; it’s not downtown Minneapolis; not downtown Chicago. I’ve built in all of those cities. We’ve built in downtown Grand Rapids and those are not really representative of what we’re doing here because we have many different types of products. Those are mixed-use products that have not only been built a chip shot away but literally 75 feet across from Van Andel arena; 15,000 feet of retail. The building in Lansing has 34,000 feet of vacant office space because the Lansing DDA bought it and they are reluctant to rent it for less than $40 per foot. It has nothing to do with us but the unit above that’s attached to a DDA ramp has been 98% occupied since that building was stabilized in roughly 2015 or 2016. These projects are incredibly successful, and it’s not being driven by the fact that we are trying to find the perfect spot to put them. There is simply a need there. And the need is driven by younger people but over the majority of it, is senior, active adults. No different than the people that are sitting here today and even those millennials that are here, what a better way to introduce them to your community. When these folks decide to sell someday, or if they are not aging in place or moving to Florida, they are already in the City of Livonia and they are contributing to the community and they’ve got good jobs and they are not having to drive 30 miles to work and can drive across Haggerty Road to Beaumont or I heard last week, I guess, U of M is now doing their second building, so that intersection is going to get a little bit busier. That’s where we started before I met Josh. We were trying to do a building on that side of the highway and one thing we ran into is, we decided we did not want to be anywhere near Haggerty Road and Seven and Eight Mile. (The audience became loud and President Toy struck the gavel for order and asked for the audience to let Mr. Woods finish). This particular parcel which is in an office park which we thought was even probably a little bit softer than being next to the large hospitals and some of the big commercial spaces and was much easier access point with 275. It was clearly what I will call the gateway into the City of Livonia. I think those things are important to note that the tough part that you have, in my opinion, is not just deciding whether this building is a good fit, but how that housing change really fits into your comprehensive land plan for the next 10 or 15 years, because what’s going to happen, and we are seeing this in other areas, this is happening in the city of Wyoming and Grand Rapids and other desirable areas and it was alluded to that without those housing needs being met, you’re going to get hit with a shadow rental market. You’re going to have investments come in that can’t afford apartment buildings, but they are going to buy houses that will be converted into rentals, so then the next issue you’ve got is having to stay on top of that. But that’s what we see happens when that demand is not being met. This property and this location you have the opportunity to address that if you feel that’s something that’s needed and I’m not sitting here telling you, that’s what you need to do in your city. I’m telling you, that as a developer, that has a building portfolio of 9,000 units and we just bought our first property, I flew back this morning from Sarasota, we bought 284 units, almost identical to this building on I-275. The need is there. It’s definitely there. We hope you see the need in your city as well because not everybody wants to buy a single-family home. There might not be single-family homes to buy. Where I’m at in Oakland County, I live in a 197-unit community and I don’t think there is one house for sale right now. The demand is there. The need is there. The people’s desire is there. As far as the product itself, I don’t think this is the appropriate forum, but these units are about 225,000-unit invested. This is a $70,000,000 project. They’re built like a $500,000 house on the inside. People live in their units; they sleep in their units; they live in the community. It’s not very well characterized by some of the people that spoke here today. That’s what a Public Hearing is about but when we get to that point, we would be more than happy to spend a lot of time describing exactly how we program these buildings. We’ve got a number of these built as examples and we’ve been very successful with these. We’ve been in business for 45 years; we’ve never defaulted on a property. We are well capitalized. We’re building in Novi. We’re building in Brighton. We hope to be building in Livonia. We are invested in Southeastern Michigan. We are invested deep in Southeastern Michigan. I live here. Josh lives here. They have extensive holdings in the City of Livonia, and I know they work with many of you as well. I want to, to the best that I can, to let you know we are committed to making this successful. We own buildings. We own three buildings on I-96 alone. One is within 50 yards of the highway. We’ve not had one move out in 312 units because of sound and that’s because we spent an extra half a million on heavy glass that when you shut the windows in the building, you don’t hear a thing. We’ve got another building that’s probably within 30 yards on the medical mile in downtown Grand Rapids on I-96, right at the College Avenue overpass. That one, when I first saw it, I’ll be honest, I was concerned with the noise and that has not been an issue either. We are used to dealing with that. My opinion is this isn’t even close to the highway. I-275 is not an issue compared to what we’ve dealt with. There are a lot of other things I think I would like to address but in the spirit of the hour, and the fact that I don’t think they were overly relevant, I don’t want to…but what I want to just talk about what we think is that true need, that true demand and where housing is at today. It’s not all about single-family like it was 15 or 20 years ago. It really isn’t. It has changed significantly. And that’s why I wrote that summary. I please implore you to read that. I’m available if you want to talk, you could come and have a session on that if that’s the next step but it’s real. And we really think the community like Livonia, you should at least take a serious look at. This is the type of product that can help address that because this is not an affordable project. It’s expensive; luxury housing is expensive, but it’s not as expensive as a $2,400 house that is 30 or 40 years old. They are priced appropriately, and they draw the type of resident that we feel would be a compliment to the community. It’s not going to drive crime. It doesn’t lend itself to those typical type of suburban affordable housing concerns, in our opinion. Toy: Ok. Thank you. Council Vice-President Jolly. Jolly: So, in four years I have not had my heart beating as fast or as hard as I just was as you were speaking, sir. There is a lot I can say in response to everything you said, all the numbers that you tossed out there. I will just say one thing. You turned my probably no into a hard no when you say (clapping from audience made this inaudible). It doesn’t matter where they go, that’s exactly our job where they go and so thanks a lot. (Audience became disruptive). Toy: (Striking gavel.) Let’s everyone settle down. Hold on. Sir, if you’d like to make a comment, go right ahead. Sir. We are at the Council level now, so yes, let’s go. Woods: I just wanted to ask, what was it, I’m sorry, the comment that made it a hard no. I wasn’t clear on that. Jolly: You know what, I’m not even going to get into it. You can get the transcript from the hearing if you’d like. Woods: Understood. Toy: Thank you. I have to tell you. I’ve served in government a long time, sir and this audience was very kind and very attentive and as you got up, I felt myself getting a little bit crazier on this whole thing. Number one, we realize the trends. We’ve seen trends but we also know that trends are, that developers should go talk to the neighbors before they start putting things in the community. (Clapping from audience). Because you would have a better feel of how these folks felt before you came and maybe you could tone your discussion as such. We do have the number 2 for millennials in this nation in the 48154 zip code. So, what I’m not worried about millennials as much as I’m worried about neighbors that have paid their taxes, been in those neighborhoods a long time, being disturbed by the kind of things they were talking about. That concerns me as a Councilperson up here. And it also concerns me as I read into trends, there is going to be declining enrollment that cities and areas are going to fight for people because people aren’t having four and six kids like they once did. So, we have to be concerned with those demographics as well. I really think you need to soul search on some of what you are saying. I appreciate the dollars that you want to spend and where you’ve been and all that, but I also think you should start talking to the people that are going to surround your properties that you are proposing in different areas. I appreciate that thank you. Is there anyone else wishing to speak to this because we’re going to close the Public Hearing pretty quick, right? We’re done? Thank you. As there were no further questions or comments, the Public Hearing was declared closed at 9:00 p.m. SUSAN M. NASH, CITY CLERK